Oh dear, that is even more locked down than many expected and much more distant from the typical Linux distro that the many Linux Desktop fans have been used to.
Either way, it doesn't matter, I'd expect whatever is running in ChromeOS (Linux Kernel) to be replaced by Fuchsia (Zircon kernel) underneath. They will more likely keep the 'ChromeOS' name to limit the confusion and that will be what these devices like that $100 Chromebook will be running in the future.
So it will be even more locked down and tightly controlled.
> They will more likely keep the 'ChromeOS' name to limit the confusion...
I mean, that would make sense. But being Google, I think they're likely to name it something different that nobody recognizes. And then change that name to something similar enough to ChromeOS to cause confusion, since they're actually separate and incompatible products.
Sigh. Sorry, I used to work for Google, on chat and video chat products.
Microkernels have always been slower than monolithic kernels, never faster.
There is zero chance that Zircon will be faster than Linux.
The classic example is Mach from CMU:
"When Mach was first being seriously used in the 2.x versions, performance was slower than traditional monolithic operating systems, perhaps as much as 25%... When Mach 3 attempted to move most of the operating system into user-space, the overhead became higher still: benchmarks between Mach and Ultrix on a MIPS R3000 showed a performance hit as great as 67% on some workloads."
Either way, it doesn't matter, I'd expect whatever is running in ChromeOS (Linux Kernel) to be replaced by Fuchsia (Zircon kernel) underneath. They will more likely keep the 'ChromeOS' name to limit the confusion and that will be what these devices like that $100 Chromebook will be running in the future.
So it will be even more locked down and tightly controlled.